FIFA is threatening a broadcast blackout in Europe’s top five football nations for this year’s Women’s World Cup in response to what president Gianni Infantino has described as “disappointing” rights offers – but former Matilda Moya Dodd alleges the global governing body is part of the problem.
For the first time, FIFA is selling the TV rights to the Women’s World Cup separately from the men’s tournament, but Infantino has been complaining for months about low-ball bids from broadcasters that he described as a “slap in the face” to players and “all women worldwide”.
FIFA president Gianni Infantino at a press conference at the 73rd FIFA Congress.Credit: AP
Infantino said broadcasters had offered only $1 million-$10 million for the rights, compared to $100 million-$200 million for rights to the men’s World Cup. Timezone differences mean the matches will be played in the mornings in Europe, and outside of primetime viewing hours, but Infantino said that was no excuse.
At a meeting of the World Trade Organisation in Geneva, Infantino promised FIFA would not cave and floated the prospect of fans in Europe’s top five football countries – Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and France – being unable to watch the event as a result.
“To be very clear, it is our moral and legal obligation not to undersell the FIFA Women’s World Cup,” Infantino said. “Therefore, should the offers continue not to be fair, we will be forced not to broadcast the FIFA Women’s World Cup into the big five European countries.”
Dodd, however, said Infantino had other options instead of condemning broadcasters for not paying enough, and even suggested a way FIFA could lead by example by taking a closer look at all previous contracts.
Former Matilda and ex-FIFA and AFC executive Moya Dodd.Credit: Janie Barrett
She said the broadcast industry had historically overvalued the rights to men’s World Cups and undervalued the women’s, because FIFA had sold them both together as a bundle but attributed all the money to the men’s rights.
“Now that FIFA has decided to sell the rights separately, it’s no surprise that the buyers don’t want to pay the same big numbers twice,” Dodd said.
“Effectively, the industry was trained to pay big money for the men’s World Cup and to treat the women’s equivalent as worthless. At the same time, the women were told they didn’t deserve prize money or equal pay because they didn’t bring the revenues.
“It’s actually quite outrageous. For FIFA to now say that all women’s revenues will go straight into women’s football overlooks the fact that the value of the women’s rights have until now been used to inflate the value of men’s football.
“Rather than scold the broadcasters, I’d like to see FIFA help shift these misconceptions by reviewing all of its bundled deals – broadcast, sponsorship, the lot – and attributing a fair proportion to the women’s game.
“If in fact the Women’s World Cup gets 50-60 per cent of the viewers of the men’s, as FIFA says, that should amount to a sum in the billions.”
Rebecca Sowden, a former New Zealand international who founded sport sponsorship and marketing agency Team Heroine, also said there were better ways for FIFA to approach the situation.
“Not broadcasting the games in key European markets would be short-sighted and a massive blow to the wider women’s football ecosystem with fans and sponsors being the biggest losers,” she said.
“Instead, FIFA should be working to better educate and demonstrate the value of women’s football, each and every year – as we see in the USA around women’s basketball and other sports – rather than popping out of the woodwork every four years when it’s time for media negotiations.
“Of course broadcasters in Europe have every right to be wary about off-peak broadcast time zones … FIFA and media partners should work together to ensure interest will be there and can be monetised by broadcasters in a way that works for all parties.”
